Estimating an EQ-5D population value set: the case of Japan
AbstractQuality adjustment weights for quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are available with the EQ-5D Instrument, which are based on a survey that quantified the preferences of the British public. However, the extent to which this British value set is applicable to other, especially non-European, countries is yet unclear. The objectives of this study are (a) to compare the valuations obtained in Japan and Britain, and (b) to explore a local Japanese value set. A diminished study design is employed, where 17 hypothetical EQ-5D health states are evaluated as opposed to 42 in the British study. The official Japanese version of the instrument and the Time Trade-Off method are used to interview 543 members of the public. The results are: firstly, the evaluations obtained in Japan and those from Britain differ by 0.24 on average on a [−1, +1] scale, and mean absolute error (MAE) in predicting the Japanese preferences with the British value set is 0.23. Secondly, comparable regressions suggest that the two peoples have systematically different preference structures (p<0.001 for 8 of 12 coefficients; F-test). Thirdly, using alternative models, the predictions are improved so that the local Japanese value set achieves MAE in the order of 0.01. Copyright Â© 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.
Volume (Year): 11 (2002)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Claire Gudex, 1994. "Time trade-off user manual: props and self-completion methods," Working Papers 020cheop, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
- Paul Dolan & Claire Gudex & Paul Kind & Alan Williams, 1995. "A social tariff for EuroQol: results from a UK general population survey," Working Papers 138chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
- Jose María Abellán Perpiñán & Fernando Ignacio Sánchez Martínez & Jorge Eduardo Martínez Pérez & Ildefonso Méndez Martínez, 2009. "Debiasing EQ-5D Tariffs. New estimations of the spanish EQ-5D value set under nonexpected utility," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2009/06, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
- Imai, Hirohisa & Fujii, Yoshinori & Fukuda, Yoshiharu & Nakao, Hiroyuki & Yahata, Yuichiro, 2008. "Health-related quality of life and beneficiaries of long-term care insurance in Japan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 349-355, March.
- Irina Cleemput, 2010. "A social preference valuations set for EQ-5D health states in Flanders, Belgium," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 205-213, April.
- Brazier, J, 2005. "Current state of the art in preference-based measures of health and avenues for further research," MPRA Paper 29762, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Julie Chevalier & Gérard Pouvourville, 2013. "Valuing EQ-5D using Time Trade-Off in France," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 57-66, February.
- Michał Jakubczyk, 2009. "Impact of Complementarity and Heterogeneity on Health Related Utility of Life," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, CEJEME, vol. 1(2), pages 139-156, November.
- W. Greiner & C. Claes & J. J. V. Busschbach & J.-M. Schulenburg, 2005. "Validating the EQ-5D with time trade off for the German population," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 124-130, June.
- John Brazier & Jennifer Roberts & Aki Tsuchiya & Jan Busschbach, 2004. "A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(9), pages 873-884.
- Méndez, Ildefonso & Abellán Perpiñán, Jose M. & Sánchez Martínez, Fernando I. & Martínez Pérez, Jorge E., 2011. "Inverse probability weighted estimation of social tariffs: An illustration using the SF-6D value sets," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1280-1292.
- Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney, 2012. "Deriving utility weights for the EQ-5D-5L using a discrete choice experiment. CHERE Working Paper 2012/01," Working Papers 2012/01, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
- Garry R. Barton & Tracey H. Sach & Anthony J. Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Michael Doherty & David K. Whynes & Kenneth R. Muir, 2008. "A comparison of the performance of the EQ-5D and SF-6D for individuals aged > 45 years," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(7), pages 815-832.
- Bansback, Nick & Brazier, John & Tsuchiya, Aki & Anis, Aslam, 2012. "Using a discrete choice experiment to estimate health state utility values," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 306-318.
- L. M. Lamers & J. McDonnell & P. F. M. Stalmeier & P. F. M. Krabbe & J. J. V. Busschbach, 2006. "The Dutch tariff: results and arguments for an effective design for national EQ-5D valuation studies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(10), pages 1121-1132.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.